In the United Kingdom, controversy has been swirling about for some time regarding the planned "three strike" legislation. Many in government have chose to support it, and the MPAA and other anti-piracy advocates have hailed the decision as a breakthrough victory. The outcry of dissatisfaction is even larger though, with thousands of bloggers, internet activists, and pro file sharing groups screaming at the audacity of the proposals. Now, UK ISP's are joining in on the badgering of the planned legislation.

A trade association for internet services in the United Kingdom, known as the Internet Services Providers' Association (ISPA), is speaking out against the desired plot by Lord Mandelson and the Department of Business, Innovation, and Skills, which plans to introduce the harshest measures to date against "alleged" file sharers.

The ISPA have stated that the Digital Economy Bill, will not only crack down on file sharers, but will prevent future technologies from evolving within the walls of the internet in the UK. The bill is supposedly meant to "strengthen the nation's communications infrastructure", but in retrospect, it will only prevent future advancements or leaps and bounds from being achieved by setting up a blockade to what users are able to accomplish with new technology.

In doing this for the UK, US, France, or any nation which plans to "regulate" or "limit" what someone can do online, a huge con is met as well, which is holding these nations back from using the users creative minds to find new found inventions or technology, while other non-regulated nations such as Korea or Taiwan are first to invent or create the new technologies, thus giving them firm market share. Limiting the capabilities of any industry, only holds the nation doing the limiting back, that's a fact.

Secretary General Nicholas Lansman, of the ISPA, stated that the "ISPA is extremely disappointed by aspects of the proposals to address illicit file-sharing, and this legislation is being fast-tracked by the Government and will do little to address the underlying problem". The ISPA says that using such preventive steps such as content filtering for all internet service providers, would be far to expensive to implement, and ineffective as users would only find a way around it. When you try to regulate or enforce control, you only open the floodgates to new means of survival and technological techniques to avoid the enforcement.

The ISPA also believes that by trying to enforce these other technical measures, that they would have "unintentional consequences such as restricting a user's access to legitimate services and protocols", which would be devastating to many whom need to use file transfer protocol, bittorrent protocol, or various http:// protocols in order for their business to survive. Many small upstart companies use these forms of file sharing to reduce expenses, and it's going to only become a problem for them.

The ISPA is an organization which believes the solution to illegal-file sharing is not regulating the net, but is to force the industry which claims it's hurting, to evolve. Secretary General Lansman stated "Rather than focusing blindly on enforcement, the Government should be asking rights-holders to reform the licensing framework so that legal content can be distributed online to consumers in a way that they are clearly demanding. The ISPA continues to believe strongly that a reduction in unlawful file sharing can only be achieved if the focus turns to the education of consumers and the reform of content licensing to enable legal alternatives at a fair price".

If in fact, the entertainment industry would resort to more forms of file sharing for a fee, the ISPA believes that it would be hugely successful, and that it would serve as an extreme economic boom. Services such as the Apple store for direct downloading, at a cost, has been amazingly successful, and the profits in which it makes are a fortune. If the industry would itself offer these services, as I've stated before, it would dramatically decrease the costs of producing the hard goods, CD's, BluRay discs, DvD discs, and similar products which cost a lot to produce, pay employees and factories to manage, and then pay distribution companies to ship.

Reducing costs, increasing profits, and satisfying the consumers, sounds like a dream scenario. It's possible, if only the industry itself is willing to change, rather than change the laws that allow the consumers to use a free and open internet. South Korea, was the first nation on Earth to implement a similar "three-strike" rule, where accused file sharers were threatened with disconnection, and warned all p2p sites to install filters preventing users from uploading copyrighted materials. In the end, piracy still runs rampant in that nation, and file sharing of copyrighted materials still exists heavily, along with a surge in VPN and peer blocking software usage.

So why combat something that will never end? Seems to me that instead of trying to win a quagmire of a war, that they would choose rather to use this form of technological innovation to increase their profit margin, and in the end try to sway users to use legal services abroad. Implementing new forms of pay as you go downloading music, videos, games, or whatever other digital media one could desire, would be an insanely large market. Doing this would only bring more users to their markets, whom normally would not pay to go to a theater, whom would not pay for a hard copy of a game, whom would not pay for a hard copy of music for fears of losing the disc or it being damaged, all of which would increase their profits.

By them not doing this, and you not seeing thousands upon thousands of pay-to-download sites legally popping up, it only shows that their schemes are not for the intention of ending file sharing. That's a complete front for the true goals, of controlling and regulating the internet. Those whom can gain control of something as powerful as the internet now, in the future, will make a fortune off the technology, including the governments, if they are able to regulate it. That's the true intention, and they will never publicly admit it, because the public would not stand for it. Instead they charade around like schoolgirls crying about their lost profits, even though they continue to make record setting gains each and every year, while file sharing communities continue to grow at the same time.

When it comes down to the freedom of humanity versus the commercial interests of government and big business, I choose freedom any day. What bothers me most, is that these industries and governments are doing all of this shady planning behind closed doors, without allowing the people, whom elect them to their positions, or buy the products of the businesses, to have any input what so ever. If a majority of the people were able to vote, and decided to abolish file sharing or regulate the net, then I would say at least they had input, even if I stood against it. That's a democratic decision made by the people, and should be respected. The fact remains though, there is no input from the people being allowed, it's continuously money that talks, and freedom that walks.

No matter what they do, we will prevail. Enable content filters? We'll find a way around it. Threaten to disconnect "alleged" file sharers? You'll have a line full of class action lawsuits, and a surge in users whom turn to VPN's or similar preventative measures. Limit one's connection speed? An ISP will only lose business to another ISP whom chooses not to participate in the mismanagement of the internet. We will win, no matter what. The ball is in their court now, whether they decide to "evolve" their infrastructure, or take on the people, is yet to be determined. Only time will tell.
By:
xxxOBSCENExxx
November 24th, 2009

The funny thing is that they still don't get it that they are against the people who got them in their position in the first place so the should keep quiet. ISPs must be on our side, it's a loss for them too if customers are getting disconnected and also it's a bad marketing move if they start spying on every user. There are many points in which this article wins in any debate over Lord Mandelsons' proposal for the Digital Economy Bill. Thanks OBS, another good one.

What these "shysters" are used too doing for money is using force. The wholesale murder and misinformation of millions of people for profit and "freedom" is sickening but more and more obvious. This is the information age not doomsday. The more we share and care the less likely it is that these "lords" and there corrupt financial systems of debt will survive. Every end is a new beginning, no matter which hyroglyphic you subscribe too. Well done Obscene on yet another tasty article. You will get my five bucks soon.